Mimicking menu choices: Menu choice failure and blame attribution of Korean customer

While populism challenges the pluralism and technocratic expertise on which public bureaucracies are based, extant scholarship has overlooked its effects on accountability processes. In particular, it neglects the impact of anti-elite rhetoric, characterized by what can be regarded as “emotionalized blame attribution,” on the thinking and behavior of accountability actors. Responding to this gap, this article examines the impact of this distinctive form of populist rhetoric on accountability relationships within the bureaucratic state. It identifies three “stages” whereby these populist pressures challenge accountability relationships, threaten the reputation of accountability actors, and result in alternative accountability practices. In doing so, the article provides a roadmap for assessing the impact of anti-elite rhetoric on accountability actions.

Download Full-text

Menu-Choice Modeling

SSRN Electronic Journal ◽

10.2139/ssrn.2162019 ◽

2012 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Wagner A. Kamakura ◽

Kyuseop Kwak

Keyword(s):

Choice Modeling ◽

Menu Choice

Download Full-text

“They Did It”: The Effects of Emotionalized Blame Attribution in Populist Communication

Communication Research ◽

10.1177/0093650216644026 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 44 (6) ◽

pp. 870-900 ◽

Cited By ~ 67

Author(s):

Michael Hameleers ◽

Linda Bos ◽

Claes H. de Vreese

Keyword(s):

Political Attitudes ◽

National Sample ◽

Blame Attribution ◽

Blame Attributions

How can we explain the persuasiveness of populist messages, and who are most susceptible to their effects? These questions remain largely unanswered in extant research. This study argues that populist messages are characterized by assigning blame to elites in an emotionalized way. As previous research pointed at the guiding influence of blame attributions and emotions on political attitudes, these message characteristics may explain populism’s persuasiveness. An experiment using a national sample ( N = 721) was conducted to provide insights into the effects of and mechanisms underlying populist blame attribution with regard to the European and national levels of governance. The results show that emotionalized blame attributions influence both blame perceptions and populist attitudes. Identity attachment moderates these effects: Emotionalized blame attributions have the strongest effects for citizens with weaker identity attachments. These insights allow us to understand how populist messages affect which citizens.

Download Full-text

“Are you asking me or are you telling me?”: Expertise, evidence, and blame attribution in a post-game interview

Discourse Studies ◽

10.1177/14614456211016820 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (5) ◽

pp. 652-669

Author(s):

Oskar Lindwall ◽

Michael Lynch

Keyword(s):

Video Clip ◽

Ice Hockey ◽

Third Order ◽

Blame Attribution ◽

Video Clips ◽

Hockey Player ◽

Action Category

This paper is an analysis of a video clip of an interview between a reporter and ice hockey player following a game in which the player was involved in a hard collision with a member of the opposing team. The paper explores blame attribution and how participants claim and disclaim expertise in a way that supports or undermines assertions to have correctly seen and assessed the actions shown on tape. Our analysis focuses on the video of the interview, and it also examines relevant video clips of the collision and various commentaries about the identities of the characters and their actions shown on the videos. In brief, the study is a third-order investigation of recorded-actions-under-analysis. It uses the videos and commentaries as “perspicuous phenomena” that illuminate and complicate how the members’ own action category analysis is bound up with issues of expertise, evidence, and blame.

Download Full-text